Designation D4002 − 81 (Reapproved 2016) Standard Practice for Evaluation of Buffable Shoe Polish1 This standard is issued under the fixed designation D4002; the number immediately following the desig[.]
Trang 1Designation: D4002−81 (Reapproved 2016)
Standard Practice for
This standard is issued under the fixed designation D4002; the number immediately following the designation indicates the year of
original adoption or, in the case of revision, the year of last revision A number in parentheses indicates the year of last reapproval A
superscript epsilon (´) indicates an editorial change since the last revision or reapproval.
1 Scope
1.1 This practice covers the definition of properties to test
and the apparatus to use, in evaluating the performance of
buffable shoe polishes
1.2 This standard does not purport to address all of the
safety concerns, if any, associated with its use It is the
responsibility of the user of this standard to establish
appro-priate safety and health practices and determine the
applica-bility of regulatory limitations prior to use.
1.3 This international standard was developed in
accor-dance with internationally recognized principles on
standard-ization established in the Decision on Principles for the
Development of International Standards, Guides and
Recom-mendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical
Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.
2 Terminology
2.1 shoe polish—aids in cleaning, improving the
appearance, and protecting leather or other shoe materials from
such common damaging effects as scuffs, water, salt water, and
other surface deposits, commonly encountered with the use of
shoes outdoors or indoors A buffable shoe polish requires
buffing to obtain appearance improvements
3 Significance and Use
3.1 This practice is intended to define the properties to be
tested, the apparatus to use, and the comparisons of product
performance It is recognized that considerable discretion
exists among formulators and marketers of shoe polish on what
properties or performance characteristics are best for their
products This practice will be flexible to honor this fact within
the confines of the shoe polish definition in2.1
4 Apparatus and Materials
4.1 Test Polish.
4.2 Control Polish—The control polish is selected
subjec-tively for comparison to the test polish It may be a competitive
product, a modified formulation of the test polish, etc The one stipulation is that, the control polish be of the same or similar type as the test polish For example, if the test polish is an emulsion polish, the control should be an aerosol-emulsion polish It would not be meaningful to select a paste or liquid product as a control for comparison to an aerosol-emulsion test polish
4.3 Test Substrates—The test substrate should be one for
which the test polish is intended Separate tests should be conducted for smooth-grained leather substrates to which the most current leather finishes have been applied at a tannery The finished leather should be the exact type normally used by the shoe manufacturer to fabricate everyday dress shoes Test substrates of man-made materials should be obtained in the same manner The test surface should be in good physical condition, not badly cracked, scratched, or otherwise damaged
so as to interfere with evaluation of polish properties Various colors are required, see Section 9
4.4 Applicators—Several methods of shoe polish
applica-tion to substrates should be tested Various types of applicators include brush, cloth, and foam The same type of applicator should be used to apply the polish for both the control and test polish
4.5 Polishing Cloth—The same type of polishing cloth
should be used for each sample Materials such as washed cheese cloth, rumple cloth, flannel, cotton diaper cloth, and nonwoven fabrics are suitable for this purpose Felt or paper should not be used
4.6 Polishing Brush—A separate horsehair brush or
horse-hair composition shoe brush should be used with each sample
4.7 Cleaning Solvent—Aliphatic solvents with
kauri-butanol values less than 38
4.8 Eye Droppers and Tap Water.
4.9 Sharp Metal Knife.
4.10 Light-Colored Wool, Polyester/Cotton Pieces, of
trou-ser or dress clothing
4.11 Thermometer.
4.12 Humidity Gage.
1 This practice is under the jurisdiction of ASTM Committee D21 on Polishes
and is the direct responsibility of Subcommittee D21.04 on Performance Tests.
Current edition approved Oct 1, 2016 Published May 2017 Originally approved
in 1981 Last previous edition approved in 2008 as D4002 - 81(2008) DOI:
10.1520/D4002-81R16.
Trang 25 Precautions
5.1 The temperature and relative humidity of the test runs
should be measured and recorded The temperature should be
within 13 to 29°C (55 to 85°F) with a relative humidity of 20
to 80 %
5.2 The substrate should have the same temperature as the
surrounding area
5.3 Comparisons should not be made between two separate
swatches (or leather objects) since leather substrates may vary
widely
5.4 Leather substrates are normally used only one time
6 Personnel and Instructions
6.1 The application and evaluation of the test and control
polishes require four individuals They should be capable of
making discriminating judgments of subjective physical and
aesthetic properties Training and orientation to specific
prod-uct performance characteristics may be required
6.1.1 The four persons should apply the polishes to one of
each of the four test substrates All persons then rate all
properties, except application properties, on the remaining
three panels that they did not apply polish to The persons
applying the polishes should rate ease of use and other
application properties This means there will be only four
readings on application properties The three rating the other
properties, do not observe the application because they rate
properties of each polish “blind.”
7 Procedure
7.1 Cleaning of Test Substrates—An aliphatic solvent
hav-ing a kauri-butanol value less than 38 should be used to lightly
wipe the test substrate Soft cotton towels may be used to apply
the solvent to the surface and to wipe it clean New or
adequately laundered towels should be used each time
7.2 Surface Subdivision—The precleaned surface of each
test substrate should be divided and outlined by tape with
uniform squares
7.3 Application of polish or wax—Assuming the control
polish or the test polish is a commercially available product,
follow the directions on the container as far as possible When
in doubt on the method of use, the directions for similar
products may be used Equal volumes of control and test polish
or wax should be used to avoid excessively thin or heavy coats
One or two applications may be used depending on the
substrate and the discretion of the tester The same number of
coats must be used for both the test sample and the control
8 Placement of Polishes or Waxes
8.1 Method A—A controlled, randomized method of laying
out the test (X) and control (C) polishes or waxes is represented
as follows:
8.1.1 These four positionings should be written on tags and drawn randomly by each of the four who apply the polishes
8.2 Method B—A controlled, randomized method of laying out the test (X) and control (C) polishes is represented as
follows:
8.2.1 These four positionings should be written on tags and drawn randomly by each of the four who apply the polishes
9 Evaluation
9.1 Compare the test polish and the control as follows:
9.1.1 Application and Buffıng Properties (ease of rub-up to maximum gloss)—During application and buffing of the
polishes, note the time and ease with which each product develops maximum gloss
9.1.2 Final Properties—Evaluate any or all of the following
properties no sooner than 5 min following application:
9.1.2.1 Gloss—Evaluate as depth of gloss and buffing 9.1.2.2 Uniformity—Observe the surface for streaks,
unpol-ished dry spots, and general uniformity
9.1.2.3 Film Clarity—Observe the clearness or sharpness of
an object’s image in the surface of the polish Overhead lights, face, hand, or other objects may be used for reflection This test may be eliminated for low-lustre surfaces that do not possess mirror-like finishes
9.1.2.4 Smear and Scuff Resistance—Smear is the degree of
oiliness or greasiness after the polish is rubbed-up to the desired polish appearance Scuff is the degree of film damage resulting from a glancing blow to the polish substrate Check smear by making a design such as an “S” with one’s finger A glancing blow with one’s knuckles or soft object such as a book or magazine may be used for determining the degree of scuff
9.1.2.5 Film Healing—Observe the length of time required
for the smear or scuff in 9.1.2.4to disappear from the polish film, should it occur
9.1.2.6 Rebuffability—Observe the ease of completeness or
repairability when the smears and scuffs are buffed with a polishing cloth The amount of physical effort and length of time required is noted
9.1.2.7 Cleaning—Observe the ease of removal of old
polish films, as well as common soiling materials such as dust, grease, oils, finger marks, beverage stains, etc This may be done either in the laboratory or observed during actual use trials of the products In the laboratory, removal of old polish may be determined by applying multiple coats (10 to 20 applications) and determining polish build-up A polish show-ing little build-up would be rated a good cleaner for old polish Other materials, such as grease, oils, etc., should be tested on
an individual basis
9.1.2.8 Water Spotting—At least 2 h after application of the
polishes, place at random to the polishes surfaces several spots
of water, about the size of a penny Allow the water to remain
on the surface for 5, 15, 30 min, and 1 h At precise intervals,
Trang 3Do not wipe! Observe the presence and degree of film damage.
Other materials such as milk, coffee, juice, alcoholic
beverages, etc., may be used to supplement the water test
9.1.2.9 Gloss Retention—Observe the degree of gloss of a
freshly applied and buffed-polish film compared to that of an
aged-polish film
9.1.2.10 Dust Attraction is measured by carefully wiping
the test surface to remove all dirt and dust Place the test
substrate in the place of your choice to accumulate dust Check
dust build-up on the panel after 24, 48, and 72 h after 1 week
9.1.2.11 Flexibility—Crease the test substrate between two
fingers Turn the substrates and crease in the opposite direction
Note the amount of polish that either falls off, dislodges,
whitens, or powders at the crease
9.1.2.12 Hiding—Scuff the leather substrate with a sharp
knife until the thin top layer has broken to expose a 1⁄4-in
(6.3-mm) path of rough area, usually of a light color Apply or
re-apply dark colored polish, in accordance with container
directions Observe degree of hiding
9.1.2.13 Staining Power—Using a single color for substrate
and polish, apply multiple coats (10 to 20 applications) of dark polish on only half of each light-colored leather substrate Observe the degree of darkening of the polished half (staining) versus the unpolished half for each sample
9.1.2.14 Dry Crock—Rub polished substrate gently with
light colored pieces of wool, polyester/cotton pieces of trouser,
or dress clothing to determine degree of rub off onto clothing
10 Report
10.1 Method A—Using8.1, all properties are rated 0 to 5 A value of 5 equals excellent and 0 equals complete failure Values in between are various degrees between these extremes This is a monadic value system for each test surface evaluated based on each individual raters own reference scale Since the three individuals rating the final properties do not know the placement sequence, each polished area is rated “blind” with
no possibility for bias
10.1.1 Form 1 should be used to record the raw data Form
Properties
Test Swatch Application No 1
Test Swatch Application No 2
Properties
Test Swatch Application No 3
Test Swatch Application No 4
Rating Scale: 0 to 5
5 = excellent 2 = fair
4 = very good 1 = poor
3 = good 0 = complete failure
N OTE1—Designate the position of the product (X or C) in the box designating the position on the test panel; for example: left, center, or right.
FORM 1 Buffable Shoe Polish Evaluation—Individual Ratings for 10.1.1
Trang 42 should be used to summarize and compare the raw data The
following calculation provides a rating factor for each property
tested:
F = rating factor for test polish,
F c = rating factor for control polish,
X property = sum of all readings of a specific property for
the test polish,
C property = sum of all readings of a specific property for
the control polish,
N = number of observations,
F = X property/N, and
F c = C property/ N.
10.2 Method B—Using8.2, all properties are rated 1 to 5,
with the control surface always given a rating of 3, regardless
of how good or bad it really is The scale has the following
adjectival ratings:
1 = significantly poorer than control,
2 = slightly poorer than control,
3 = no difference from control,
4 = slightly better than control, and
5 = significantly better than control
This value system is a paired comparison with the control
surface always acting as the point of reference Since the three
individuals rating the final properties need the control surface
to be identified, the identification of the control product must
not be revealed to prevent bias
10.2.1 Form 3 should be used to record the raw data Form
4 should be used to summarize and compare the raw data The following calculation provides a rating factor for each property tested
F = rating factor for test polish,
X property = sum of all readings for a specific property for
the test polish,
N = number of observations, and
F = X property/ N.
Specific properties of the control are assigned a value of 3.0
11 Precision and Bias
11.1 Method A—Due to the subjective nature of this test
method, no precision and bias can be established
11.2 Method B—(Same as A.) However, since all the rating
factors are in relation to the control, the values can be analyzed statistically to determine if the differences observed are sig-nificant
12 Keywords
12.1 buffable; buffing; dry crock; film; healing; leather applicator; polish; rebuffability; resistance; scuff; shoe; smear; substrate
Products Compared
Surfaces Used for Testing
Date _Evaluator _
Summary of Product (X) Properties Summary of Control (C) Properties
FORM 2 Buffable Shoe Polish Evaluation—Individual Ratings for 10.1.1
Trang 5Test Swatch Application No 1
Test Swatch Application No 2
Properties
Test Swatch Application No 3
Test Swatch Application No 4
Rating Scale: 1 to 5
5 = significantly better than control
4 = slightly better than control
3 = no difference from control
2 = slightly poorer than control
1 = significantly poorer than control
FORM 3 Buffable Shoe Polish Evaluation—Individual Ratings for 10.2.1
Products Compared
Surfaces Used for Testing
Date _Evaluator _
Summary of Test Product Properties Summary of Control Product Properties
FORM 4 Buffable Shoe Polish Evaluation—Individual Ratings for 10.2.1.
Trang 6ASTM International takes no position respecting the validity of any patent rights asserted in connection with any item mentioned
in this standard Users of this standard are expressly advised that determination of the validity of any such patent rights, and the risk
of infringement of such rights, are entirely their own responsibility.
This standard is subject to revision at any time by the responsible technical committee and must be reviewed every five years and
if not revised, either reapproved or withdrawn Your comments are invited either for revision of this standard or for additional standards and should be addressed to ASTM International Headquarters Your comments will receive careful consideration at a meeting of the responsible technical committee, which you may attend If you feel that your comments have not received a fair hearing you should make your views known to the ASTM Committee on Standards, at the address shown below.
This standard is copyrighted by ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, PO Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959, United States Individual reprints (single or multiple copies) of this standard may be obtained by contacting ASTM at the above address or at 610-832-9585 (phone), 610-832-9555 (fax), or service@astm.org (e-mail); or through the ASTM website (www.astm.org) Permission rights to photocopy the standard may also be secured from the Copyright Clearance Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923, Tel: (978) 646-2600; http://www.copyright.com/